Personal Dignity: The TSA and Premptive Searching of the American Citizens' Body

[W]e believe that all governments do have to answer to citizens’ aspirations for dignity and the rule of law, and that no nation can or should deny those rights. -- Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, May 3, 2012

Decades ago, a store owner would think carefully before stopping a customer to ask for their receipt. In these earlier times, this sort of intrusion would have required sensitivity and proper judgment because of the very real possibility that the person could feel humiliated and angered. American citizens openly demanded their dignified treatment.

Today, customers shopping at certain establishments form queues by otherwise open doorways and they wait to have their receipts and purchases compared before leaving.

In allowing merchants to request their receipts, the customers had allowed an important change in their treatment: The bad actions of the few, the shoplifters, have resulted in the loss of the tacit understanding that they are to be presumed innocent and be treated as such.

After the terrorist event of 9/11 and the subsequent passage of the Patriot Act, a great deal has been asked of American citizens.

Routine public searches are now accepted as a part of life for the American traveler. The touching of the person's body in full view of others has become acceptable. The equipment in use today is fully capable of displaying a citizen's genitalia, and children who travel are being subjected to the same treatment - a reality that, not long ago, would have been considered alien to our American society.

"[She] said 'Just let me finish the pat down'; unfortunately, when I was raped in college, my rapist said 'Just shut up and let me finish.' I began having flashbacks..." - Anonymous [link]

Today, a man watches as his wife or daughter is searched by people he does not know, for reasons he knows are not applicable and in ways he could never allow otherwise, for a greater good. Not submitting to the searches would mean a disruption in their lives as there would be no practical alternative for long commutes. Even protesting a search could be difficult. The man's traveling partners may dismiss an intervention by him because of the uncomfortable attention it might bring and a fear that such a complaint would be judged as petty by onlookers who have already resolved to submit to a search of their person.

The TSA is determined in the execution of it's duties and it is unflinching and mostly immune to the criticisms of both American citizens and their elected officials.

Questions to Ask

Over time, what opinion could younger law enforcement officers form about a citizenry that can be indefinitely compelled to submit to personal searches?

In terms of sensitivity and respect, what may result as law enforcement officers become acclimated to the searching of ordinary citizens?

What is the limit to how safe every American must be from terrorism?

What is the limit to what may be asked of a citizen in guarding them against terrorism?

Assuming a "zero-tolerance" view of the threat of terrorism, what is the logic behind not doing even more thorough and invasive searches?

What techniques, devices and protocols are being developed and marketed to further the pursuit of citizens' protection?

At what point does a citizen's expression of dislike for a perceived personal indignity become a prosecutable event?

What sort of world view is being inculcated in our younger generations by their exposure and acclimation to these emerging societal norms?

How or when will it be known by U.S. citizens that these procedures are no longer necessary?

Without the help of older citizens, will the young of this age have sufficient perspective to recognize the implications of these societal changes?

A community of concerned or critical citizens who want to know and research the nation's problems.

Fair Use Statement This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not have been authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

PROTECT IP and SOPA Warning: Currently, U.S. legislators are preparing laws at the urging of entertainment corporations ostensibly to lessen piracy. Sweeping measures that have been considered contain draconian provisions that allow for the disabling of foreign and domestic websites containing information that may be critical for the proper understanding and consideration of political issues that are of concern to American voters. Because of the broad nature of these bills and possible 'unintended consequences', the proprietor of this site considers it likely that much of the content brought to you here could be impacted. Letters of protest have been made public by civil rights organizations, educators, librarians, and internet industry experts. This site requests that you become informed about PROTECT IP, SOPA and current threats to information sharing by visiting the Electronic Frontier Foundation.